Re: virtual functions and access specifiers

Hello,
I have looked at
(1) http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/strange-inheritance.html
and then at
(2) http://www.gotw.ca/publications/mill18.htm
They seem to give opposite advise.

In particular, (2) gives these guidelines:
Guideline #1: Prefer to make interfaces nonvirtual, using Template
Method. Guideline #2: Prefer to make virtual functions private
Guideline #3: Only if derived classes need to invoke
the base implementation of a virtual function, make the virtual
function protected.

while (1) says:
[23.3] Should I use protected virtuals instead of public virtuals?
The cheapest + fastest + lowest risk approach in my experience ends
up resulting in most virtuals being public

[23.4] When should someone use private virtuals?
Almost never.

(1) seems to say that virtuals should be (end up being) public,
while (2) says they should be private unless there is a reason to
make them public.

for (1) is it just because when a virtual function is private, then
dervived

class developers

might think they cannot override it?

If i am starting a new project, if I think people will not be
confused by the private virtuals,

should I stick to (2) ?